It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
It's said that Culapanthaka was a dullard because in previous existence he had made fun/ criticise (other translation) a bhikkhu who was very dull. But in life in general, sometimes we are praised or blamed or criticised. We may criticise (whether through speech or mind) other people, they can be monastic members or lay people.
I heard a monastic member said in the Dhamma talk, Culapanthaka became dull because he criticised a monk that has attained a degree of enlightenment, I assume four stages of enlightenment (Sotapanna, Sakadagami, Anagami and Arahat).
If, for example, one sees someone does something wrong, then his mind goes "it's not proper for him to speak and do such and such thing". And that person happened to be someone who has attained a level of enlightenment. Does this criticism make our kamma somehow weightier? Thanks.